| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Sensfan101
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
500 Posts |
 Posted - 07/12/2010 : 21:58:08
|
Poll Question:
Which of these two defencemen would you rather have on your team?
|
|
|
|
Sensfan101
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
500 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2010 : 22:03:14
|
This is a very tough call. I would give Volchenkov a slight edge in physical play and obviously a huge edge in shot blocking but Hamhuis has far better offensive ability. I will vote for Volchenkov just because I'm biased :)
You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky |
 |
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2010 : 22:39:47
|
I'm not really sure that you can compare the two - both bring different things to the game, and you hire them for different reasons.
Ideally, I'd like both. Glad my team has at least one. |
|
|
|
Jumbo Joe Rocks
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
410 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 06:09:45
|
I would take Volchenkov,Hard hitter,Blocks shots but not as much points as Hamhuis.They both have limited playoff expierience so I chose Volchenkov for the regularr eason.
GO SHARKS GO |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 07:10:19
|
Volchenkov.
Better defence, strikes fear in your opponents, best shot blocker in the league.
Hamhuis is a pretty good, young, all-around defenceman, but he doesn't excel at anything per se. For ten points more a season? No thanks, I'll take a guy who is #1 and top ten in a couple of categories . . . (shot blocking / hitting)
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 07:44:12
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by slozo[/i]
[br]Volchenkov.
Better defence, strikes fear in your opponents, best shot blocker in the league.
Hamhuis is a pretty good, young, all-around defenceman, but he doesn't excel at anything per se. For ten points more a season? No thanks, I'll take a guy who is #1 and top ten in a couple of categories . . . (shot blocking / hitting)
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Completely agree. Hamhuis is a nice complimentary player but he is not a #1 on any team. He is getting overpaid and Vancouver will have regrets. Not with the signing, but with the costs.
I really dig Volchenkov, but another thing to consider is who his playing partner is. When I've watched OTT games, Phillips was often Volchenkov's partner. He is grossly under rated and it becomes easier to make hits and go down to block shots when you have a jugernaut like Phillips with you.
I think that defensive pairing was better than the sum of it's parts and this season will show that on both fronts. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 09:04:34
|
Can i answer this after this season?  As Beans pointed out, pairings are often overlooked. Perhaps it's why Beauchemin and Komisarek struggled in TO last year? They're both much better than they showed there.
As nuxfan said, they're (Hamhuis/Volchenkov) both different and tough to compare. I really believe the Canucks are hoping Hamhuis has much more offensive abilites than he's been able to show playing behind Weber and Suter in Nashville. That is yet to be seen! With Volchenkov, you pretty much know what you get, and personally, i love what he brings! I would prob give him the slight edge overall at this point. At least until Hamhuis increases his goals and points to something like 15G-30A-45pts |
|
|
|
FLYING -V
Top Prospect
69 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 09:36:43
|
I'm going to disagree with everybody and say Hamhuis. He moves the puck much better than Volchenkov does and contributes at both ends of the ice. Plus Volchenkov barely speaks english. Close call though.
Its not worth winning if you cant win big! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 09:59:16
|
quote:
Completely agree. Hamhuis is a nice complimentary player but he is not a #1 on any team. He is getting overpaid and Vancouver will have regrets. Not with the signing, but with the costs.
If you're referring to the 4.5/year that we're paying him, I really don't think we're overpaying. I think he would have gotten more than that on the open market, and do believe reports that he took a hometown discount on $$ (perhaps in exchange for an extra year).
If Hamhuis continues to play the way he did in NAS, even if his offense stays the same, I'll be happy with this signing. Hamhuis is a very good all-around defenseman, and does well at a little bit of everything. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 10:27:36
|
You can look at it two ways. Market Value and Comparative Value.
Market value, specifically in July, is high by a large amount. I agree that Hamhuis would have gotten his cash regardless of where he signed, but that does not mean he is worth it.
Comparatively speaking, consider that Weber, Brewer, Kaberle, Volchenkov, Liles, Ballard, Streit, Regehr, Gilbert, Whitney, Pitkanen, Meszaros, Michalek, Zidlicky, Wideman, and Kubina(to name a few) are all players who could be compared to Hamhuis in one way or any another. In many cases, one could say many of these guys are better than Hamhuis in many facits of the game.
All of these guys have contracts with a lower cap hit than Hamhuis.
If I told you Hamhuis was virtually a top 25 defensemen in the NHL today, would you agree?? Because that's how he is getting paid!! |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 11:45:16
|
Beans, while i do see your point, your comparisons are really not equals, of course, they never are, are they?
What i'm getting at is this, there are guys on your list like Shea Weber who ANYONE in their right mind would prefer over Hamhuis but not only is he at the same price (4.5M) as Hamhuis, he's also an RFA after next season and will obviously command much more then! If you're gonna compare him to Hamhuis, in fairness, you'd have to compare what Weber would get on the open market that Hamhuis just experienced!!!
I don't have nearly enough time to look into all the other guys salaries and statuses that you listed but i'm sure some are in the same boat? I'd also take Hamhuis over most of the guys you listed! There`s a few i`d say are better, but not many! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 12:38:42
|
As Alex said - Beans, the NHL is a'changing whether you like it or not. Contracts that were signed 2 or 3 years ago are just that - 2 or 3 years old and out of date. What was the cap back then - 50M? You could not pay dmen that sort of salary then and still field a team, but you can now, and people will.
Most of the dmen you pointed out will be UFA or RFA in the next year or two - do you think they'll be signing for the same amounts they did in their previous contracts? As well, when the Hamhuis deal is up in 6 years time, what will the cap be then? Perhaps all around dmen will be making 6M a year, and Hamhuis will seem like a steal.
Hamhuis would have gotten that deal from more than one other team - which means that more than one team crunched the numbers, tried to look into the future, and felt that that amount would have been good value over the life of a deal. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 14:24:43
|
As an Ottawa Senators fan, I have seen a lot of Anton Volchenkov.
And boy oh boy, is he a skilled defensive defensemen. This guy will sacrifice his body for the sake of the team, in any cirumstance, at any time.
He is a team player. (Which, I don't feel many Russians are.)
He plays a very sound defensive game. He may not get you points, but he will stop a ton of shots from getting to the net. I mean a ton. He hits like a train, too.
I've seen a bit of Hamhuis, although not as much as Volchenkov. And, Hamuis is well rounded, but he's no Anton.
I'm very sad to see Volchenkov go. Very, very sad. But, I like Gonchar too. And at this point, Gonchar is what we need. An offensive man on the point, to pair with the defensive Phillips.
Up until this Free Agency, I have always said that Anton Volchenkov is hugely underrated. But, I am starting to see him get a bit of recignition around the NHL and from fans alike.
If you don't watch him play much, you'll not know much about Anton's game. If you watch him, he's far from invisible. The guy plays other teams best offensive threats every game, and does a tremendous job of it. He blocks shots, makes big hits, has good stick work for taking the puck away, and just shuts you down any way he has to.
The only thing he lacks, is offense. But, with his defense, you don't need it.
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 17:36:20
|
Hey Vancouver Fans, take off you Vancouver hats for a second and look at the world for what it is.The comment was made that most of the players were UFA/RFA next season?? Really??
Only Weber, Brewer, Kaberle, and Pitkanen of the 16 players I named are on the market next year.
Secondly, of course Weber will get more money. Substantially more now that a guy like Hamhuis signed for $4.5 million a season!! Look, GM's ALWAYS overpay UFA's. It's the nature of the game and I am not arguing that point. It is the way of the NHL and I am not a moron. I realize that. But that does not mean that the player's salary is reasonable as compared to the rest of the market.
Look, before Hamhuis even wanted to sign with Vancouver, if I told you about a player who has 1 of 6 NHL season with more than 30 points, has never had a 10 goal season, has been his teams #3 defensemen for his entire career, would you be going out to pay his $4.5 million?I mean c'mon. He is NOT a #1 defensemen on most NHL teams but he is getting paid #1 money. Lower end #1 money but still.
Seriously, before you jump all over me again. take the time to compare Hamhuis straight up to say Andrej Meszaros or Marek Zidlicky. Both guys are better players and both get paid less on similar term contracts. Neither guy is going to be confused at a #1 defensemen in the league any time soon but they also don't play for your home team. Does that not tell you that his comparative value is low??
Finally, the reason I say that Vancouver will regret the signing is this list of the potential UFA defensemen for 2011 and 2012 season. Tell me you would not gladly give up Hamhuis and add a $1m-ish(Maybe $2 million for the first couple of guys) in salary to have one of these guys??
Chara
Markov
Rafalski
Suter
Kaberle
Pitkanen
Phillips
Liles
Wideman
Burns
Kronwall
Or make an offer sheet to one of :
Seabrook
Weber
Doughty
Gilroy
Mike Green
Hedman
Barker
Let's not forget that after this season the Canucks will also have to resign Erhoff and Salo or replace them.
All I am saying is that Hamhuis is their guy. They bet their cash on Hamhuis and paid him as such. They might be able to afford another guy in the same kind of ballpark but they are taking themselves out of the running for an elite UFA d-man in the next couple of seasons.
For that sole reason, I take Volchenkov 6 ways to Sunday. Better player, fair value. Hamhuis is paid fair any less than $4m a season. |
|
|
|
FLYING -V
Top Prospect
69 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 19:16:46
|
Beans, as a non-canucks fan I would take Dan Hamhuis any day of the week over any of your POTENTIAL UFAs except Chara,Markov,Suter and Kronwall. All of whom who are unlikely to hit free-agency anyways. And even if they do, Vancouver still has to compete against twenty-nine other teams for their services.
And really, how often do you see big-ticket RFAs changing teams? Almost never, So that removes the possibility of the Canucks missing out on Drew Doughty for Dan Hamuis.
If every defenceman in the NHL was lining up to play for the Vancouver Canucks than maybe things would be different, but the fact of the matter is, that Hamhuis was a sure thing. They signed him when they had the chance, and while he may not be entirely deserving of 4.5 million a year, I higly doubt the canucks are going to regret this signing.
Its not worth winning if you cant win big! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 20:23:43
|
Beans:
I'm curious to know what your definition of "#1 dman" is - and please don't say "its the dude that plays more than anyone else on your team", because that is not it. There are not very many true #1 dmen in the league - defensemen that would be the defacto #1 dman wherever they went, and command both the minutes and the PP time that would come with that designation. I can think of this list:
- Lidstrom
- Chara
- Weber
- Pronger
- Keith
- Green
- Campbell (anywhere but CHI)
- Seabrook (anywhere but CHI)
- Doughty
- Phaneuf
- Markov
- Gonchar
There might be others, but this is what I could think of off the top of my head.
These defensemen are an elite group of dmen. Hamhuis is not one of them, and likely never will be. And, he is not getting paid as they would (or will do when their current contracts are up).
The Canucks have never been a team to go for the #1 dman. Instead, they try to fill their team with 4 or 5 guys that could be #2 or #3 dmen with other teams, and have a well balanced defense instead of one dominated by 1 guy. It doesn't matter how many top #1 dmen are available next summer, the odds are that the Canucks would not be in the running for any of them.
quote:
Let's not forget that after this season the Canucks will also have to resign Erhoff and Salo or replace them.
Erhoff will be a priority for Gillis this season, and he'll command a raise. Salo will be gone after this year, and likely replaced with someone cheaper, so we can use some of his money to resign Erhoff. I'm hoping we can keep Erhoff for Hamhuis-type money, fingers crossed.
quote:
Seriously, before you jump all over me again. take the time to compare Hamhuis straight up to say Andrej Meszaros or Marek Zidlicky
I would rather have Hamhuis than both of these guys. I have never been terribly impressed with Meszaros, he had one good year, then held OTT ransom and then left and dissapointed. Zidlicky I don't know very well honestly, but the fact that he's 5'11/190 and 33 years old pretty much tells me all I need to know.
quote:
Tell me you would not gladly give up Hamhuis and add a $1m-ish(Maybe $2 million for the first couple of guys) in salary to have one of these guys??
I would rather have the d that we have now. Hamhuis (and Ballard for that matter) is a solid addition to a defense that could score but lacked defensive capabilities and strength and depth down the stretch. He brings an all-around solid game, has size and speed, can score and block and hit, and is young. I think he'll fit well with into a very impressive top-6 for VAN this year, that will be a lot tougher to play against. |
Edited by - nuxfan on 07/13/2010 20:24:28 |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 20:27:31
|
quote:
For that sole reason, I take Volchenkov 6 ways to Sunday. Better player, fair value. Hamhuis is paid fair any less than $4m a season.
Again, I say you get them for different reasons - there is no comparison to be had. Truthfully, I'd love to have had both, and would happily take Volchenkov over the Ballard move. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 06:01:31
|
Wow, you Canucks fans really overrate Hamhuis. I agree with Beans, he's overpaid . . . a product of free agency, and being young and having all kinds of "potential".
And nuxfan arguing that there are very few de facto #1 defencemen, then naming 12 players (more than a third of the league) and leaving off a bunch more (Boyle, Streit, Kaberle, Visnovsky, Myers, probably more) that would take the number to more than half the teams in the league.
How could you leave off Streit and Boyle? These guys are perrenial candidates for Norris, dude!
So yes, Hamhuis contract is inflated because he just signed, and some of those players were on longer deals and such . . . but really, Hamhuis AT THIS POINT IN TIME cannot be grouped with these guys. Sorry, but he can't.
However, as mentioned, when talking about top shut down d-men, Volchenkov is on the very short list. Shot blocker? Best in the league. Hitter/checker? Again, on the very short list of the top few . . . one of the few Sens I always respected and liked, and he is a class player to boot.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
Edited by - n/a on 07/14/2010 06:03:51 |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 09:57:13
|
Slozo, I did say that my list was not complete and off the top of my head. Boyle of course I would add. Streit I would not. (Streit for the Norris, really?)
There are a bunch of what I would call "second tier top dmen", who play as the #1 on their team by default, and might be the #1 with other teams. Streit, Kaberle, Vishnovsky, would be there. Meyers is still too young to call.
My point was, not every team has a "#1 dman". CHI has more than one.
I would not group Hamhuis with any of those guys either - feel free to read my whole post before you comment on it  . I don't think Hamhuis will become one of those players, (although I'd be pleasantly surprised if he did), hence his salary is not 5.5+ per year. At 4.5, he's paid as an above average dman in the league and that is what he is. He has tremendous upside as well, and I think its a solid signing. Other GM's also seemed to value him at that point.
And AGAIN...to compare him to Volchenkov is not really a fair comparison, because they are different. Its like comparing Hank Sedin and Malhotra - which one would you rather have on your team? Both play C, but both play very different roles at C, and bring different things.
I don't think anyone is arguing that Volchenkov is not a premier shutdown dman, and highly valuable in that role. I would have been happy to have him at the price NJD paid for him, although I'm not sure about the length of the deal - time will tell. |
Edited by - nuxfan on 07/14/2010 09:57:51 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 10:15:24
|
Well, as much as I often post that there is are Blue Tinted Glasses on many Leafs fans, it appears that there are Orca's clouding the images of Canuck Fans!!
If you would like to know my definition of what a #1 defensemen is, it is a player who has the ability to log 22+ minutes a game, play exceptional hockey on either end of the ice, and be relied on by their team as their best defensemen.
Not all #1 defensemen need to be puck moving/offensive focused players. For example, Z. Michalek, Paul Martin, and Volchenkov last season were their teams #1 d-man and they are not offensively focused.
Finally, if one can not see Marek Zidlicky for what he is, there is nothing more to say. The comment that he is 33 as a bad thing is a joke. Most defensemen will play well into their late 30's and many elite defensemen play their best hockey at the age of 30 or older. Furthermore, Zidlicky has produced more in his worst season than Hamhuis has in the past 4 years!!!
I dunno. Take a player who is been perenially his teams #3 defensemen and has not produced more than 30 point in 4 years over a player who has produced more than 40 points in 5 of the lasdt 6 seasons??
By the way, Zidlicky produced more when he was playing on the same team as Hamhuis.
One can never argue against Fan bias, and that his exactly what this is. |
Edited by - Beans15 on 07/14/2010 10:27:07 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 10:26:33
|
For the sake of argument, I listed the entire NHL and what I would consider to be their #1 defensemen. Their current cap hit is in brackets. You are right in that some teams do not have what one can consider a legitimate #1 defensemen, but the vast majority do(some have more than 1). Tell me, looking at this list who Hamhuis would remove at #1 defensemen today??
*I do not believe the #1 defensemen is the highest paid defensemen. I used my judgement of the players. For example, for FLA I consider Wideman their #1 because I think he is a better player than McCabe.*
Anaheim-Visnovsky ($5.6)
Atlanta - Hainsey ($4.5)
Boston -Chara ($7.5)
Buffalo - Myers ($1.3)
Carolina - Pitkanen ($4.0)
Calgary - Bouwmeester ($6.7)
Chicago - Keith ($5.5)
Columbus - Commodore ($3.8)
Colorado - Liles ($4.2)
Dallas - Robidas ($3.3)
Detroit - Lidstrom ($6.2)
Edmonton - Whitney ($4.0)
Florida - Wideman ($3.9)
Los Angeles - Doughty ($3.5)
Minnesota - Zidlicky ($4.0)
Montreal - Markov ($5.8)
Nashville - Weber ($4.5)
New Jersey - Volchenkov ($4.3)
NY Islanders - Streit ($4.1)
NY Rangers - Rozsival - ($5.0)
Ottawa - Gonchar ($5.5)
Philladelphia - Pronger ($4.9)
Phoenix - Jovonovski ($6.5)
Pittsburgh - Martin ($5.0)
San Jose - Boyle ($6.7)
St. Louis - Brewer ($4.3)
Tampa Bay - Kubina ($3.8)
Toronto - Phaneuf ($6.5)
Vancouver - Erhoff ($3.1)
Washington - Green ($5.3)
Considering this list, there are maybe 3-4 teams in the entire NHL I would consider Hamhuis ahead of their current #1. Even on his own team, I would put Erhoff and Edler ahead of him. But he is getting paid more than 1/2 of the league "#1 defensemen."
Listen, he is a great player to add to any team, don't get me wrong. He does really nothing poorly. But he also does nothing exceptionally. As Slozo said, Volchenkov might not bring any offense to the table, but he is also remarkable at what he does. Top 5 in the league as a shut down defensemen.
Beans, out. |
Edited by - Beans15 on 07/14/2010 10:34:29 |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 11:15:10
|
Beans, looking at your list, Hamhius would replace the following IMO:
- ATL (Hainsey 4.5M)
- CAR (Pitkanen 4M)
- CBJ (Commodore 3.8M)
- COL (Liles, 4.2M)
- EDM (Whitney 4M)
- MIN (Zidlicky, 4M)
- NYR (Rossy, 5M)
- STL (Brewer, 4.3M)
2 teams I'm on the fence for:
- BUF (Myers, 1.3M) - I think he would be just based on experience, but would probably be paired with Myers. Once Myers RFA deal is up he'll be in the 5-6M per year dealsize.
- FLA (Wideman, 3.9M) - again, paired with
As for Van, he is penciled into a very evenly balanced top4 - I don't think even VAN knows where he'll end up, they'll see who meshes at camp. Top 4 are pretty much set though, in Ballard/Hamhuis/Edler/Erhoff. Salo and SOB will be third paring, whoever shines at camp will be 7th. Bieksa is as good as traded at this point.
quote:
Listen, he is a great player to add to any team, don't get me wrong. He does really nothing poorly. But he also does nothing exceptionally. As Slozo said, Volchenkov might not bring any offense to the table, but he is also remarkable at what he does. Top 5 in the league as a shut down defensemen.
*sigh*. Yes, as mentioned over and over and over...Volchenkov is a great defensive dman and is great at what he does. I would have loved to see Gillis get them both, but after hedging bets with Ballard we had room for only one of them. You get them for different reasons, and Gillis surely felt that we had enough solid defense with our top 6 that we didn't need the pure defensiveness of Volchenkov vs the well rounded defensiveness of Hamhuis. So he signed Hamhuis.
Defending Hamhuis in this thread does not constitute an attack on Volchenkov. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 11:20:08
|
quote:
Finally, if one can not see Marek Zidlicky for what he is, there is nothing more to say
OK Beans, good point with Zidlicky. I would still take Hamhuis over him based on age and physical play, but Zidlicky is certainly an above avg offensive dman. He has made the most of his minutes playing in MIN for sure. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 13:49:53
|
Again, if someone would take Hamhuis over Pitkanen, Whitney, Zidlicky, not much else I can say.
Brewer and Hamhuis are close, but I would agree with an edge to Hamhuis based on age and durability.
Myers I take over Hamhuis (and actually many other NHL players) as you can't teach that kind of size and skating ability and baring any injury, he will be the best defenseman in the NHL in 2-3 years.
I take Wideman as well, based on performance to this point in his career(116 pts in the past 3 season compared to 77 for Hamhuis in the same time period).
So that leaves 3-4 guys that I would agree would take a back season to Hamhuis.
|
Edited by - Beans15 on 07/14/2010 13:51:28 |
|
|
|
Guest7792
( )
|
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 14:34:12
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by Beans15[/i]
[br]Hey Vancouver Fans, take off you Vancouver hats for a second and look at the world for what it is.The comment was made that most of the players were UFA/RFA next season?? Really??
Only Weber, Brewer, Kaberle, and Pitkanen of the 16 players I named are on the market next year.
Secondly, of course Weber will get more money. Substantially more now that a guy like Hamhuis signed for $4.5 million a season!! Look, GM's ALWAYS overpay UFA's. It's the nature of the game and I am not arguing that point. It is the way of the NHL and I am not a moron. I realize that. But that does not mean that the player's salary is reasonable as compared to the rest of the market.
Look, before Hamhuis even wanted to sign with Vancouver, if I told you about a player who has 1 of 6 NHL season with more than 30 points, has never had a 10 goal season, has been his teams #3 defensemen for his entire career, would you be going out to pay his $4.5 million?I mean c'mon. He is NOT a #1 defensemen on most NHL teams but he is getting paid #1 money. Lower end #1 money but still.
Seriously, before you jump all over me again. take the time to compare Hamhuis straight up to say Andrej Meszaros or Marek Zidlicky. Both guys are better players and both get paid less on similar term contracts. Neither guy is going to be confused at a #1 defensemen in the league any time soon but they also don't play for your home team. Does that not tell you that his comparative value is low??
Finally, the reason I say that Vancouver will regret the signing is this list of the potential UFA defensemen for 2011 and 2012 season. Tell me you would not gladly give up Hamhuis and add a $1m-ish(Maybe $2 million for the first couple of guys) in salary to have one of these guys??
Chara
Markov
Rafalski
Suter
Kaberle
Pitkanen
Phillips
Liles
Wideman
Burns
Kronwall
Or make an offer sheet to one of :
Seabrook
Weber
Doughty
Gilroy
Mike Green
Hedman
Barker
Let's not forget that after this season the Canucks will also have to resign Erhoff and Salo or replace them.
All I am saying is that Hamhuis is their guy. They bet their cash on Hamhuis and paid him as such. They might be able to afford another guy in the same kind of ballpark but they are taking themselves out of the running for an elite UFA d-man in the next couple of seasons.
For that sole reason, I take Volchenkov 6 ways to Sunday. Better player, fair value. Hamhuis is paid fair any less than $4m a season.
Dude you are [Moderator Edit - Even implying a personal attack is against the rules. Please refrain from any further personal comments]. Hamhuis turned down higher offers and took less to play in Vancouver. All of the tsn analysts said it was a good signing at a very good price. And don't say you know more about hockey than them because you don't - clearly beans on toast you are lacking in that dept...
|
Edited by - Beans15 on 07/14/2010 15:18:37 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 15:17:16
|
Thanks for the Feedback. Next, please read the forum rules that talks about personal comments/attacks as well as only posting when you have something relevant to bring to the thread.
I have my opinion and I couldn't care less if it matches those on TSN or not. Last time I checked, TSN were not perfect in their opinions. Secondly, if you disagree with my opinion, argue the opinion with something relevant. Because TSN said so???
Again, thanks for the Feedback. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 15:47:44
|
| hm, perhaps this forum should not allow anon posting... |
|
|
|
Guest7360
( )
|
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 18:32:28
|
| RULES ARE WHAT MAKES UP A GENTLE SOCIETY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 05:23:35
|
Just a quick note here on the topic, and to those saying that you "can't compare these two defencemen":
We're not asking you to pretend they have the same skill set - two players very rarely do. In fact, one of the things that has made this discussion so interesting is the different dynamics each brings to the table, and what people think would bring better value to their team.
So I say - good topic. If you don't like it, don't comment!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest6840
( )
|
Posted - 07/18/2010 : 21:02:01
|
Volchenkov is injury prone. Injury prone D can screw you. The Canucks know that first hand. I'd rather have Hamhuis. As for shot blocking, I'd rather have Ballard. I agree Volchenkov brings it all in one (Ballard and Hamhuis obviously don't). But it's been three years since he's played 70 games. Hamhuis and Ballard are iron men.
Also, how long did it take the cap to go up by 60 million? 4.5 will seem like nothing in 3 years time. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 07/18/2010 : 21:24:39
|
Volchenkov misses time each year, due to the amount of shots he blocks, and the amount of big hits he makes.
It's inevitable that he gets injured, with the amount of each of the above that he does in a single game, every game.
I'd say that he actually does pretty well, as far as injuries go. For a guy who does what he does, night in, night out.
I loved having Volchenkov on the Sens. He'll be missed greatly. Adding Gonchar certainly helps, for producing offense from the back end up. Especially on the Power Play. But, Volchenkov's defensive presence will be noticed, and felt hard.
Having Phillips, Volchenkov & Gonchar would have been amazing though. Too bad we couldn't afford all three. :P
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/19/2010 : 09:30:43
|
Injuries??
I would rather have one of the top 2-3 defensive players in the NHL for 70 games over just about ANY #3 defensemen for 80 games.
I am also not surprised that someone would claim they would pick Ballard as a shot blocker. Who does he play for again??
I see Orca's swimming........
Kidding. Ballard is a better player than people give him credit for as he has been in the cellars of Phoenix and FLA for the past 5 seasons. Many would be surprised to know that he actually blocked more shots and laid out more hits than Volchenkov last season. Further to that, he has only missed 13 games in his entire NHL career including 4 of the last 5 years of 82 games and 3 straight seasons without a single missed game.
Ballard is worth his money. He does what Hamhuis does but is far better defensively. |
|
|
|
Guest6840
( )
|
Posted - 07/19/2010 : 19:07:50
|
Volchenkov hasn't hit the 70 game mark in 3 years. Don't be suprised if he plays less than sixty games. Don't be suprised if he never plays a full season again.
I like what Volchenkov brings, but if I was building a D core, I'd want men made of iron (get it- iron man... i'm a funny guy).
Look at how many times teams have won/lost series based on the health of their defensive core. |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 07/19/2010 : 20:51:44
|
"If you would like to know my definition of what a #1 defensemen is, it is a player who has the ability to log 22+ minutes a game, play exceptional hockey on either end of the ice, and be relied on by their team as their best defensemen."
half the players in your list of #1 dman for each team really dont match up with your idea of a #1 dman, they may all be able to log 22 minutes plus a game but your also saying they should be the most balanced defenseman on the team someone who no matter the situation you feel comfertable having them on the ice.
Green, Streit, Markov, Gonchar, Erhoff- Offensively gifted but not what i would call EXCEPTIONAL in their own end
Volchenkov, Martin, Brewer, Whitney- Great in their own but are not EXCEPTIONAL in the offensive zone
most #1 dman are exceptional in one area, thats how they stand out |
|
|
|
Tiller33
PickupHockey Pro
389 Posts |
Posted - 07/19/2010 : 21:59:50
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by Beans15[/i]
[br]Injuries??
I would rather have one of the top 2-3 defensive players in the NHL for 70 games over just about ANY #3 defensemen for 80 games.
I am also not surprised that someone would claim they would pick Ballard as a shot blocker. Who does he play for again??
I see Orca's swimming........
Kidding. Ballard is a better player than people give him credit for as he has been in the cellars of Phoenix and FLA for the past 5 seasons. Many would be surprised to know that he actually blocked more shots and laid out more hits than Volchenkov last season. Further to that, he has only missed 13 games in his entire NHL career including 4 of the last 5 years of 82 games and 3 straight seasons without a single missed game.
Ballard is worth his money. He does what Hamhuis does but is far better defensively.
And maybe he'll knock some sense into Luongo ... sorry couldn't help it |
|
|
|
Guest6831
( )
|
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 14:19:05
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by Beans15[/i]
[br]Thanks for the Feedback. Next, please read the forum rules that talks about personal comments/attacks as well as only posting when you have something relevant to bring to the thread.
I have my opinion and I couldn't care less if it matches those on TSN or not. Last time I checked, TSN were not perfect in their opinions. Secondly, if you disagree with my opinion, argue the opinion with something relevant. Because TSN said so???
Again, thanks for the Feedback.
It is clear that your hatred for the Canucks clouds your judgement.
My argument wasn't only 'cuz TSN said so'. They are experts, professionals, and you my friend moderate a forum. It is
relevant that the TSN analysts reported that the deal was a good one and for the right price. Their opinions are worth more than yours - sad but true isn't it.
Also, I see that you took my literary advice and now use the term couldn't care less correctly. You are welcome.
Last I checked this thread is titled Hamhuis vs Volchenkov and not Hamhuis vs Beans.
Peace out.
|
|
|
|
Guest6831
( )
|
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 14:26:52
|
oh and I voted for Volchenkov and am a Canucks fan.
lols at Oiler fans... |
|
|
|
FLYING -V
Top Prospect
69 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 16:40:36
|
Note to everybody. Hits and blocked shots are really not useful statistics at all. They're misleading and make slightly above-average defensemen, such as Volchenkov, look like superstars.
There's more to being a great shut-down D-man than laying guys out and stopping shots on goal.
Newsflah, Volchenkov is really not the defensive powerhouse everyone's playing him up to be. Anybody watch the playoffs this year? As the stud defenseman you guys think he is you would expect himto be able to limit crosby to a little less than 14 points. Hal Gill did it.
Volchenkov may dominate the two categories you guys insist on using as proof of greatness defensively, but his puck skills are mediocre, as is his hockey IQ. I'm not saying he isn't a valuable defenseman, but lets not confuse him with a number 1 guy.
Dan Hamhuis is also not a number one guy. But his passing skills far exceed Volchenkov's and while he may not be as good without the puck, overall, I'm going to have to give him the edge
Its not worth winning if you cant win big! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 18:48:37
|
So, couple of things.
1) Volchenkov's game is fully rated on the one series of playoffs they played?? Well, Halak played really average hockey against the Flyers, is that why he got a huge raise?? A player is judged over a period of time and Volchenkov has been a brilliant defender for a long period of time.
2) Passing?? Really, I don't know how you can gauge that. Sure, Hamhuis has more assists but he also had more giveaways. I don't think that one can clearly say who is a better passer straight up.
Just a couple of thoughts. But they did not come staight from Pierre McGuire's mouth so I am sure some think they are simply garbage. That's ok too. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2010 : 11:38:07
|
Note to Flying-V:
Statistics for hitting and blocking shots ARE, in fact, useful. They exactly tell you how many recorded hits the player made, and how many shots they blocked. They do not, in fact, mislead me or most others on anything, actually, because I know how to read and comprehend English.
Hitting (checking) and blocking shots are a part of the game of hockey, and can be an important part of a defenceman's job, especially when they are relied upon for a defensive role.
Newsflash, Flying V: Volchenkov didn't play against Crosby for the most part, actually . . . I thought I had remembered that, and the stats from each game bear that out:
PIT / OTT series
GAME 1 - Ott5, Pit4
Volchenkov: +1, 1a (Crosby 3 pp assists)
GAME 2 - Pit2, Ott1
Volchenkov: even (Crosby 1g, 1a)
GAME 3 - Pit4, Ott2
Volchenkov -1 (Crosby 1ppg, 1a)
GAME 4 - Pit7, Ott4
Volchenkov -3 (Crosby 2g, 2a)
GAME 5 - Ott4 - Pit3
Volchenkov -1 (Crosby 1g, 1a)
GAME 6 - Pit4 - Ott3 (OT)
Volchenkov +2, 1a (Crosby 0 pts, -2)
boo-yah. 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2010 : 12:05:02
|
The game stats don't shed light one way or the other, from the +/- and point combinations, it is possible that volchenkov did play against Crosby's line in all 6 games, with the exception of game 2. And in game 2, it might just have been a weird line change, PIT would have had last change and could have snuck Crosby on when Volchenkov was not. It would be helpful to see Crosby's +/- in this comparison.
If not Volchenkov playing against Crosby, arguably one of the best defensive dmen in the league according to this thread, then who?
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Hamhuis vs. Volchenkov 
